Man, you take a great deal of interest in me. At the very least I guess I should be flattered. Now in what way would you like me to take responsibility for my statements? I mean, its not like I am denying them. I think he was an absolutely horrible moderator. Probably because he was so biased against those who actually believe in the teachings of the Church. For some reason he could not keep his biases out of his moderation. Anyway, are you expecting me to tell this to him personally? I am not sure what you want.

I do have one question for you, Papist -

How in the world do you justify your name on CAF, i.e. East and West, with this Latinist attitude which, whether you intend it or not, pervades all that you write on this forum.

a poster stating that Eucharistic Adoration is not ordinarily observed in the Eastern Churches, Catholic or Orthodox, because our attitude toward the Eucharist is one of banality (I hope I have that correctly. I was dumbstruck when reading it, particularly as it was posted by a member who is reputedly an Eastern Catholic, not by one of the newcomers over there whose ecclesial affiliations seem to defy definition)

Was this a part of my thread (Eucharistic Adoration and the East) I wonder? Whose post was it?

Addendum: I echo the comments by my friend and brother, username. The blatant misinformation bandied about as to Eastern Catholicism (and Eastern Orthodoxy) at that site is an incredible abuse.

I'm glad you brought that up. I have been wanting to clarify: I don't in any way deny that ignorance of Eastern Catholicism (and Eastern Orthodoxy) is a huge problem among Latins (and at CAF in particular, from what I've heard, but obviously you'd know more about that than I would). I only object to attempts to stereotype Latins. As you said in your next sentence: "There are Latin Catholics who are both knowledgeable and respectful of the East" (emphasis added).

Concerning EWTN, my impression is that question directed to the Eastern Catholic Forum will usually receive an appropriate response. Unfortunately, questions about Eastern Catholicism are sometimes directed to one of the other fora, and the responses sometimes include misinformation.

And I have been to Chicago (All Saints) and will probably be visiting again...(she said as she ducked to avoid the theological food fight).We have our own building now; we moved in about a month ago.My daughter is moving to Chicago this fall, (she's Lutheran and has a Church picked out, but when I visit she wants to go to church with me. She met Fr. Reardon at the Lutheran Colloquium and would like to visit) so maybe we'll run into each other sometime.Now let's get out of this thread, before we get hit with some rotten produce... I'd be interested in what you thought of the Western Rite.

For one thing, I can't see what EO objections can be sustained by any who have seen such a Divine Liturgy. And the TLM has nothing on you guys.

Please let us know when you and/or your daughter are in town. Btw, our assitant priest is Fr. David Lynch (please pray for him, he is recovering from cranial surgery) was pastor of St. Augustine WRO in Denver before his retirement.

Logged

Question a friend, perhaps he did not do it; but if he did anything so that he may do it no more.A hasty quarrel kindles fire,and urgent strife sheds blood.If you blow on a spark, it will glow;if you spit on it, it will be put out; and both come out of your mouth

How in the world do you justify your name on CAF, i.e. East and West, with this Latinist attitude which, whether you intend it or not, pervades all that you write on this forum.

I used to attend a Ruthenian Parish and was very much enamored with many of the things that I learned and experienced there. The pastor of our little Parish was an amazing, saintly man. Fr. Chris Zuger. Anyway, I found through reseach that that parish was not the norm. That there was a growing movement among Eastern Catholics to reject certain articles of the Catholic faith, and then do so as if that is perfectly inline with the Church which is a blatant lie. So, I moved further and further away from all things eastern. Now I am sorta stuck with the screen name I have at CA.

« Last Edit: April 05, 2008, 12:02:28 PM by Papist »

Logged

"For, by its immensity, the divine substance surpasses every form that our intellect reaches. Thus we are unable to apprehend it by knowing what it is. Yet we are able to have some knowledge of it by knowing what it is not." - St. Thomas Aquinas, Summa contra gentiles, I, 14.

"For, by its immensity, the divine substance surpasses every form that our intellect reaches. Thus we are unable to apprehend it by knowing what it is. Yet we are able to have some knowledge of it by knowing what it is not." - St. Thomas Aquinas, Summa contra gentiles, I, 14.

For one thing, I can't see what EO objections can be sustained by any who have seen such a Divine Liturgy. And the TLM has nothing on you guys.

Please let us know when you and/or your daughter are in town. Btw, our assitant priest is Fr. David Lynch (please pray for him, he is recovering from cranial surgery) was pastor of St. Augustine WRO in Denver before his retirement.

He is in our prayers.And thank you for you hospitality. We will let you know when we are in town; and please, I hope you will do the same next time you visit here.

Having been to TLM (Latin NO an Tridentine EO) at my husband's very traditional RC parish, I have to agree with you, that there is a difference, something that I can't quite wrap words around...

Logged

We are always living God's future in a broken present, the Gospel is always a word of reconciliation from God's future spoken ahead of its time"

We would mind because our tradition and our rubrics for our Liturgy include the filioque. Yes, it does not need to be in the Creed for the Greeks, but it is required in our Liturgy. This would be like me going to a Ruthenian parish and explicitly reciting the filioque as part of the Creed just to make a point. That would be unacceptable.

When I have on rare occasions attended Mass at a Latin parish I never say the words "and the Son" when the creed is recited, but no one really notices because I simply go silent at those words.

Logged

"All that the Father has belongs likewise to the Son, except Causality." St. Gregory Nazianzen

"We should believe that divine grace is present in the icon of Christ and that it communicates sanctification to those who draw near with faith."St. Theodore Studite

I was sorry to hear that Irish Melkite has been banned, because his input in the thread entitled, "4 in UGCC claim consecration as bishops from underground bishops," would have been very helpful.

Apotheoun,

Thanks for the compliment. Frankly, I don't know that I would have commented - I'm fairly certain that I didn't do so in the thread on the topic at ByzCath. My interest in vagante episcopi notwithstanding, this story is too farcical to merit much discussion. They claim episcopal ordination by bishops of the underground church - a church that has been above-ground for almost two decades now - and don't name them. Their motivation, to save the UGCC from itself; apparently their consecrators saw that need, but weren't up to the task for whatever reason and decided to front these 4 as surrogates.

If you're going to go vagante, pull out the recliner, drape it with some brocade and call it a cathedra, tout the names of your episcopal lineage, and announce that you're ready to accept in communio sacris all those who share your belief in the corrupt nature of whomever you're schisming from - and give a name to your ecclesia. The Holy True Ukrainian Greek-Catholic Patriarchate and Major-Metropolitinate of Pidhirtsi has a ring to it. Then if, as in this case, you are seeking to assure that all understand your intent to remain in communion with Rome, while renouncing His Beatitude, Lubomyr, hie thee off to Rome, and prostrate at the feet of His Holiness, Benedict. Based on whether or not you get front-page coverage in Osservatore Romano, Zenit, or the Ukrainian Times, decide whether to commit to signing a mortgage note on a cathedral or maintain the monastery rec room as your seat of power.

Many years,

Neil

PS - with all due respect to my Ukrainian brethren, Catholic and Orthodox, whom I hold dear, I have got to say that I know of no other body of Eastern Christians among whom there is such a need for everyone - and I mean everyone - to have their own Church. A tongue-in-cheek thread used to appear periodically at ByzCath in which folks would catalogue the latest collection of Ukrainian jurisdictions. Some would disappear, new ones would arise, but the number never decreased, it inevitably grew from year to year.

Logged

"Not only is it unnecessary to adopt the customs of the Latin Rite to manifest one's Catholicism, it is an offense against the unity of the Church."

Papist, please do run a laundry list/a good post of how you think Eastern Catholics misrepresent Papal Catholicism? Speak from experience, cite examples, and I am sure you will have specific examples, speak of which doctorine/dogmas, and how they stray.. etc.. let it flow, you are now one with the keyboard.

Note: In this post I have clearly asked for a list and then support to justify the list, ie, detail, examples, doctorine/dogmas. It was meant clearly for a list then an explanation to be given for each issue.

Papist, please do run a laundry list/a good post of how you think Eastern Catholics misrepresent Papal Catholicism? Speak from experience, cite examples, and I am sure you will have specific examples, speak of which doctorine/dogmas, and how they stray.. etc.. let it flow, you are now one with the keyboard.

Are you seriously asking or ar you baiting?

Logged

"For, by its immensity, the divine substance surpasses every form that our intellect reaches. Thus we are unable to apprehend it by knowing what it is. Yet we are able to have some knowledge of it by knowing what it is not." - St. Thomas Aquinas, Summa contra gentiles, I, 14.

If anyone wants to discuss any of the issues raised above, let's start a new thread. I realize we are off topic now and alot of that has to do with me.

« Last Edit: April 07, 2008, 01:35:54 PM by Papist »

Logged

"For, by its immensity, the divine substance surpasses every form that our intellect reaches. Thus we are unable to apprehend it by knowing what it is. Yet we are able to have some knowledge of it by knowing what it is not." - St. Thomas Aquinas, Summa contra gentiles, I, 14.

Serious as the Pope on Pascha, I want to know what you're thinking. I'm not baiting, I am being serious.

When Eastern Catholics do the say that is ok to reject:1) Purgatory2) The Immaculate Conception3) The Ecumenical Councils between the seventh and Vatican II4) Original Sin5) Papal Infallibility 6) The Universal Jurisdiction of the Pope7) The procession of the Holy Spirit from the Father and the Sonetc.When they reject these and then state that its ok with the Church to do so, they are misrepresenting Catholicism to the world.

Logged

"For, by its immensity, the divine substance surpasses every form that our intellect reaches. Thus we are unable to apprehend it by knowing what it is. Yet we are able to have some knowledge of it by knowing what it is not." - St. Thomas Aquinas, Summa contra gentiles, I, 14.

When Eastern Catholics do the say that is ok to reject:1) Purgatory2) The Immaculate Conception3) The Ecumenical Councils between the seventh and Vatican II4) Original Sin5) Papal Infallibility 6) The Universal Jurisdiction of the Pope7) The procession of the Holy Spirit from the Father and the Sonetc.When they reject these and then state that its ok with the Church to do so, they are misrepresenting Catholicism to the world.

Ok, still interested, expand and explain, and give personal experiences if need be. We could make this another thread?

We can make this another thread. But I am off to lunch, so I'll have to back to this later

Logged

"For, by its immensity, the divine substance surpasses every form that our intellect reaches. Thus we are unable to apprehend it by knowing what it is. Yet we are able to have some knowledge of it by knowing what it is not." - St. Thomas Aquinas, Summa contra gentiles, I, 14.

When Eastern Catholics do the say that is ok to reject:1) Purgatory2) The Immaculate Conception3) The Ecumenical Councils between the seventh and Vatican II4) Original Sin5) Papal Infallibility 6) The Universal Jurisdiction of the Pope7) The procession of the Holy Spirit from the Father and the Sonetc.When they reject these and then state that its ok with the Church to do so, they are misrepresenting Catholicism to the world.

Why Papist, I'm surprised at you!

Not surprised that you would complain about those things, but surprised by what you didn't include in your list. For example, I notice you made no complaint about ECs considering Gregory Palamas to be a saint, whereas in the not-to-distant past you went so far as to call his philosophy "vile".

When Eastern Catholics do the say that is ok to reject:1) Purgatory.....When they reject these and then state that its ok with the Church to do so, they are misrepresenting Catholicism to the world.

Before you berate your Eastern Catholic brethren about "misrepresenting" Catholic beliefs, you should update yourself with what the Catholic Church currently believes.Have you read your Pope's encyclical "Spe Salvi"? He is saying what the Orthodox have been saying for 2000 years. The concept is akin to "the river of fire" where the fires of "purgatory" are in fact, the Divine Energies, and that the old Latin concept of measurable duration of "time" in purgatory is in fact nonsensical.Is Pope Benedict XVI also misrepresenting Catholicism?

47. Some recent theologians are of the opinion that the fire which both burns and saves is Christ himself, the Judge and Saviour. The encounter with him is the decisive act of judgement. Before his gaze all falsehood melts away. This encounter with him, as it burns us, transforms and frees us, allowing us to become truly ourselves. All that we build during our lives can prove to be mere straw, pure bluster, and it collapses. Yet in the pain of this encounter, when the impurity and sickness of our lives become evident to us, there lies salvation. His gaze, the touch of his heart heals us through an undeniably painful transformation “as through fire”. But it is a blessed pain, in which the holy power of his love sears through us like a flame, enabling us to become totally ourselves and thus totally of God. In this way the inter-relation between justice and grace also becomes clear: the way we live our lives is not immaterial, but our defilement does not stain us for ever if we have at least continued to reach out towards Christ, towards truth and towards love. Indeed, it has already been burned away through Christ's Passion. At the moment of judgement we experience and we absorb the overwhelming power of his love over all the evil in the world and in ourselves. The pain of love becomes our salvation and our joy. It is clear that we cannot calculate the “duration” of this transforming burning in terms of the chronological measurements of this world. The transforming “moment” of this encounter eludes earthly time-reckoning—it is the heart's time, it is the time of “passage” to communion with God in the Body of Christ[39]. The judgement of God is hope, both because it is justice and because it is grace. If it were merely grace, making all earthly things cease to matter, God would still owe us an answer to the question about justice—the crucial question that we ask of history and of God. If it were merely justice, in the end it could bring only fear to us all. The incarnation of God in Christ has so closely linked the two together—judgement and grace—that justice is firmly established: we all work out our salvation “with fear and trembling” (Phil 2:12). Nevertheless grace allows us all to hope, and to go trustfully to meet the Judge whom we know as our “advocate”, or parakletos (cf. 1 Jn 2:1).

Logged

If you're living a happy life as a Christian, you're doing something wrong.

Re: the "time durations" in Purgatory. You accurately convey the common popular misconception of this but inaccurately convey the official teaching. The time durations do not measure time spent in Purgatory but the number of days of penance a penitent would have had to perform in the early Church for a certain offense. To clear up this frequent misconception, Servant of God Pope Paul VI wisely issued a new Enchiridion of Indulgences in 1968 which simply distinguished indulgences as partial and plenary.

Re: the "time durations" in Purgatory. You accurately convey the common popular misconception of this but inaccurately convey the official teaching. The time durations do not measure time spent in Purgatory but the number of days of penance a penitent would have had to perform in the early Church for a certain offense. To clear up this frequent misconception, Servant of God Pope Paul VI wisely issued a new Enchiridion of Indulgences in 1968 which simply distinguished indulgences as partial and plenary.

Fine and dandy, except that you still run into a problem with the "Sabbatine Privilege" unless there are days of the week in Eternity. But anyway, this thread isn't about the Latin errors, it's about how Latins (and one Latin in particular) treat their Eastern Catholic brothers. If anything, their Eastern Catholic brothers can help the Latins out of the Labyrinth of logical and theological errors they have placed themselves.

Logged

If you're living a happy life as a Christian, you're doing something wrong.

Fine and dandy, except that you still run into a problem with the "Sabbatine Privilege" unless there are days of the week in Eternity. But anyway, this thread isn't about the Latin errors, it's about how Latins (and one Latin in particular) treat their Eastern Catholic brothers. If anything, their Eastern Catholic brothers can help the Latins out of the Labyrinth of logical and theological errors they have placed themselves.

Papist, please do run a laundry list/a good post of how you think Eastern Catholics misrepresent Papal Catholicism? Speak from experience, cite examples, and I am sure you will have specific examples, speak of which doctorine/dogmas, and how they stray.. etc.. let it flow, you are now one with the keyboard.

Not surprised that you would complain about those things, but surprised by what you didn't include in your list. For example, I notice you made no complaint about ECs considering Gregory Palamas to be a saint, whereas in the not-to-distant past you went so far as to call his philosophy "vile".

I think we may be having a positive influence on you!

God bless,Peter.

I am so sorry. Let me correct my error. There is also a huge problem with Eastern Catholics considering people like Palamas, saints.

Logged

"For, by its immensity, the divine substance surpasses every form that our intellect reaches. Thus we are unable to apprehend it by knowing what it is. Yet we are able to have some knowledge of it by knowing what it is not." - St. Thomas Aquinas, Summa contra gentiles, I, 14.

I am not sure what you want me to say. I have already explained how the ECs misrepresent the Catholic faith.

Logged

"For, by its immensity, the divine substance surpasses every form that our intellect reaches. Thus we are unable to apprehend it by knowing what it is. Yet we are able to have some knowledge of it by knowing what it is not." - St. Thomas Aquinas, Summa contra gentiles, I, 14.

So, do Western and Eastern Catholics disagree on matters of doctrine? In my own search for the Church, people have often suggested that I become an Eastern Catholic. This would be a way for me to have the best of both worlds (the worlds being Catholicism and Orthodoxy). However, the impression I have been getting is that many Eastern Catholics do not accept doctrines which are required belief in the Catholic Church. It seems that many Eastern Catholics say to themselves, "We will acknowledge the existence of papal authority, but we will not accept any commands from this authority that are not in accord with our own Eastern tradition." Others seem to simply pretend that these theological differences do not exist.

I have absolutely no problem with Eastern Catholics having different practices about clerical celibacy, offering the Eucharist to infants, using leavened bread, using a different liturgy, following different fasting guidelines, or having various other different disciplinary practices. What troubles me is that there are teachings which are binding upon Catholics that many Eastern Catholics seem to either ignore or oppose.

Eastern Catholics should be able to be both Catholic and Eastern. However, when an apparent conflict occurs, which is more important, to be Catholic or to be Eastern? St. Alexis chose Eastern. The various Eastern Catholic posters who come here and complain to the Orthodox that the Western Catholics do not appreciate or understand them seem very close to making the same choice.

I am trying to be very diplomatic and courteous about it, but perhaps I see some of the same difficulties with Eastern Catholicism that Papist does.

If the Eastern Catholics are absolutely correct in every doctrine and teaching, including those which are in opposition to that taught by Rome, why not just be Orthodox? Would it not be better to be in communion with those also holding to the true faith, rather than be in communion with those holding to western heresies? If one can hold to the Orthodox faith and be in communion with Rome, what is everyone arguing about, and why has reunion not already occured?

I'm not making a judgment in this post about whether or not the Orthodox Church or the Catholic Church is the true Church. I haven't made up my mind about that yet. I am simply remarking that I observe a contradiction between the beliefs of Eastern and Western Catholics, and I am wondering how this can be.

So, do Western and Eastern Catholics disagree on matters of doctrine? In my own search for the Church, people have often suggested that I become an Eastern Catholic. This would be a way for me to have the best of both worlds (the worlds being Catholicism and Orthodoxy). However, the impression I have been getting is that many Eastern Catholics do not accept doctrines which are required belief in the Catholic Church. It seems that many Eastern Catholics say to themselves, "We will acknowledge the existence of papal authority, but we will not accept any commands from this authority that are not in accord with our own Eastern tradition." Others seem to simply pretend that these theological differences do not exist.

The problem is very complicated. If you ask people like Todd, they will outright deny essential Catholic dogmas what that are de fide statements. For example: Papal infallibility, Universial Jurisidiction, the Councils after number seven, etc. Others will accept the entirety of the Catholic faith but simply look at it from an Eastern perspective. Melikites tend to be for the former type. Most Ruthenians that I have met in person tend to be of the latter.

I have absolutely no problem with Eastern Catholics having different practices about clerical celibacy, offering the Eucharist to infants, using leavened bread, using a different liturgy, following different fasting guidelines, or having various other different disciplinary practices. What troubles me is that there are teachings which are binding upon Catholics that many Eastern Catholics seem to either ignore or oppose.

Which is exactly the problem that I have with the current state of Eastern Catholicism. While there are many good, faithful, and saintly Eastern Catholics, there are those who took the Church's call to de-latinize as permission to abandon the Catholic faith while maintaining the name "Catholic".

Eastern Catholics should be able to be both Catholic and Eastern. However, when an apparent conflict occurs, which is more important, to be Catholic or to be Eastern? St. Alexis chose Eastern. The various Eastern Catholic posters who come here and complain to the Orthodox that the Western Catholics do not appreciate or understand them seem very close to making the same choice.

This seems to echo my thoughts exactly. I cannot even begin to sympathize with a person who claims to be Catholic yet rejects the Catholic faith simply in order to be "Eastern". I don't think being an Eastern Catholic requires that one reject the faith of the Church. But some do.

I am trying to be very diplomatic and courteous about it, but perhaps I see some of the same difficulties with Eastern Catholicism that Papist does.

I probably come off as very harsh because of my zeal for the truth of the Catholic faith, but I just believe it to be gravely immoral to call oneself Catholic and then reject the truths of the Church. In this day of reletivism the Church must speak with one voice, the voice she has always spoken with. Eastern Catholics need to remember the words of St. Iraneaus who says, "With this Church [Rome] all churches must agree...becuase her superior origin."

If the Eastern Catholics are absolutely correct in every doctrine and teaching, including those which are in opposition to that taught by Rome, why not just be Orthodox? Would it not be better to be in communion with those also holding to the true faith, rather than be in communion with those holding to western heresies? If one can hold to the Orthodox faith and be in communion with Rome, what is everyone arguing about, and why has reunion not already occured?

Both excellent question that I have been asking for the last few years. To the first one, I have never been given a sufficient answer. To the second, the EOs believe that Catholics are heretics and schismatics. Which, of course, is what traditional Latin Catholics like myself believe about the EOs (which I do not mean as an insult. I am just illustrating what the traditional Latin Catholic view is).

I'm not making a judgment in this post about whether or not the Orthodox Church or the Catholic Church is the true Church. I haven't made up my mind about that yet. I am simply remarking that I observe a contradiction between the beliefs of Eastern and Western Catholics, and I am wondering how this can be.

Many of us wonder about the same thing. Apostolic Christianity is simply a mess right now.

Logged

"For, by its immensity, the divine substance surpasses every form that our intellect reaches. Thus we are unable to apprehend it by knowing what it is. Yet we are able to have some knowledge of it by knowing what it is not." - St. Thomas Aquinas, Summa contra gentiles, I, 14.

If the Eastern Catholics are absolutely correct in every doctrine and teaching, including those which are in opposition to that taught by Rome, why not just be Orthodox? Would it not be better to be in communion with those also holding to the true faith, rather than be in communion with those holding to western heresies?

Exactly!

I was an Eastern Catholic and was often told by clergy and laity alike that it is not mandatory to hold the same understandings on issues and doctrines as that of the Latin Church such as: Filoque, papal infallibility, IC, and purgatory, original sin, etc.

It caused a confusing dichotmy in my mind. I thought to myself: "These issues and doctrines are innovations of the post-schism Latin Church. As Eastern Catholics, why do we not come into union with Holy Orthodoxy."

I was strernly rebuked for such remarks.

I was consistently told to study Orthodoxy, to worship like the Orthodox, to hold Orthodox theological precepts and praxis, but do not be Orthodox---they are schismatics!!!

I was injured by the identity crisis in the Eastern Catholic Church and I was opposed to the innovations of Rome. So I made the only logical decision. I joined the one, holy, catholic, and apostolic Church---the Holy Orthodox Catholic Church!

I was an Eastern Catholic and was often told by clergy and laity alike that it is not mandatory to hold the same understandings on issues and doctrines as that of the Latin Church such as: Filoque, papal infallibility, IC, and purgatory, original sin, etc.

It caused a confusing dichotmy in my mind. I thought to myself: "These issues and doctrines are innovations of the post-schism Latin Church. As Eastern Catholics, why do we not come into union with Holy Orthodoxy."

I was strernly rebuked for such remarks.

I was consistently told to study Orthodoxy, to worship like the Orthodox, to hold Orthodox theological precepts and praxis, but do not be Orthodox---they are schismatics!!!

I was injured by the identity crisis in the Eastern Catholic Church and I was opposed to the innovations of Rome. So I made the only logical decision. I joined the one, holy, catholic, and apostolic Church---the Holy Orthodox Catholic Church!

If this was your experience, then I am not surprised that you are Eastern Orthodox. It sounds like the EO church is much more suited to your belief system.

Logged

"For, by its immensity, the divine substance surpasses every form that our intellect reaches. Thus we are unable to apprehend it by knowing what it is. Yet we are able to have some knowledge of it by knowing what it is not." - St. Thomas Aquinas, Summa contra gentiles, I, 14.

Besides, most Latin Catholics that I know think that the Eastern Catholic Church is the Orthodox Church.

I am always shocked by this. I learned about Eastern Catholics when I was in high school, around sixteen years old.

Logged

"For, by its immensity, the divine substance surpasses every form that our intellect reaches. Thus we are unable to apprehend it by knowing what it is. Yet we are able to have some knowledge of it by knowing what it is not." - St. Thomas Aquinas, Summa contra gentiles, I, 14.